The Journal of reproductive medicine 2013-01-01

Clinical comparison of ovarian stimulation and luteal support agents in patients undergoing GnRH antagonist IVF cycles.

Charles E Miller, Edward Zbella, Bobby W Webster, Kevin J Doody, Mark R Bush, Michael G Collins

Index: J. Reprod. Med. 58(3-4) , 153-60, (2013)

Full Text: HTML

Abstract

To explore the comparative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of agents used for ovarian stimulation and luteal support when applied in a population of women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol.A phase 4, multicenter, randomized, open-label, exploratory clinical trial was performed at 7 assisted reproductive technology centers in the United States. Subjects included 173 women aged 18-42 years with a documented history of infertility who were undergoing IVF. Subjects were randomized to treatment with highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) or recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (rhFSH) for ovarian stimulation and progesterone vaginal inserts (PVIs) or intramuscular injection of progesterone in oil (PIO) for luteal support. Protocols for IVF followed the standard practices of participating centers within the parameters of the study.Biochemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates were the main outcome measures. Ongoing pregnancy rates for individual treatment groups ranged from 44.0-46.9%. No statistically significant differences were observed in pregnancy outcomes for the comparisons of HP-hMG vs. rhFSH or PVI vs. PIO. All study medications were generally safe and well tolerated.In this study HP-hMG and rhFSH were equally effective for ovarian stimulation during GnRH antagonist IVF cycles. Both PVI and PIO are viable options for luteal support.